As one who believes that abortion is the taking of a life -- indisputable scientific fact -- yet may not meet the legal definition of murder, I tend to be cautious in my disagreement with others on this issue. Fifty-two years ago I helped my then-boss rob a liquor store to obtain the money to pay for his wife's abortion. In doing so I abetted abortion when it was illegal. I would still permit it today through the second trimester. Were I able to decree it I would forbid abortion in the third trimester for any reason other than to save the life of the mother. Yet given my rather expansive "permission" for abortion I cringe when I think of the maniacal insistence of the dominant faction of the pro-choice movement for abortion-on-demand up to the second before birth, and sometimes even after birth. Is the soul conceived at the moment of physical conception? Why not? The condition of Chaos existed up to the moment of Light.
What is truly grotesque is the dismemberment of the child to perform what has become known as "partial-birth abortion". How grotesque is that? It is so gut-wrenching that Facebook will not permit pictures of the process in any post. Yet that is what Representative Scanlon champions but lacks the courage to defend or justify. She should be charged with political hit and run.
Thank you. I enjoy reading the thoughts of people who know enough that they know they don't have all the answers, but still wrestle toward a "common good" solution. Your columns and your work reflect that.
Barbara Boxer suggesting that right to life begins when you bring the baby home from the hospital (normally 2 days after birth). Later give a chance to clarify context as slip of tongue, she refused.
I recently had someone tell me that Bobby Jindal was against abortion even if it was due to rape. While I don’t have the same exact position as Jindal, I found it ironic that this person described Jindal’s position as “cruel.” I guess aborting babies is not.
Your religion forbids you from having an abortion? Good. Don't have one. No one cares. Roe, or not, abortion is here to stay and there's nothing you can do about it. This is no longer 1973. Abortion pills can, and will, be handed out like candy so no girl is forced into childbirth against her will. Also, even Trump said he wants "exceptions" in cases of rape and incest. Anyone wanting a health care provider to perform an abortion will just say she was raped. Problem solved. Roe, or not. Abortion ain't going anywhere.
Nice deflection. Abortion supporters do that, and I’m not surprised, but it’s such a lame argument here. The point is that Scanlon called lifesaving measures for a struggling child “grotesque.” That says more about her, and people who support abortion, than anything I will ever write.
Rep. Mary Scanlon, D-Pa., said she opposes the GOP’s "grotesque attempt to politicize abortion care and criminalize doctors." Many would agree with her, Christine.
And….no o e is forced into getting pregnant. Rape is an extreme exception. The vast majority of abortions are chosen out of convenience, not necessity.
True. But, they'll be able to say they are "raped" to get an abortion.
Just saying, Roe, or not, is not going to stop girls and women from having abortions. It seems to me you think the end of abortion was when the Supreme Court tossed out Roe and gave it to the states to handle. Roe, or not, will not stop anything.
"Your religion forbids you from having an abortion? Good. Don't have one. No one cares." Wow. Pretty cool customer aren't you Sophia? What does your religion say about abortion?
As one who believes that abortion is the taking of a life -- indisputable scientific fact -- yet may not meet the legal definition of murder, I tend to be cautious in my disagreement with others on this issue. Fifty-two years ago I helped my then-boss rob a liquor store to obtain the money to pay for his wife's abortion. In doing so I abetted abortion when it was illegal. I would still permit it today through the second trimester. Were I able to decree it I would forbid abortion in the third trimester for any reason other than to save the life of the mother. Yet given my rather expansive "permission" for abortion I cringe when I think of the maniacal insistence of the dominant faction of the pro-choice movement for abortion-on-demand up to the second before birth, and sometimes even after birth. Is the soul conceived at the moment of physical conception? Why not? The condition of Chaos existed up to the moment of Light.
What is truly grotesque is the dismemberment of the child to perform what has become known as "partial-birth abortion". How grotesque is that? It is so gut-wrenching that Facebook will not permit pictures of the process in any post. Yet that is what Representative Scanlon champions but lacks the courage to defend or justify. She should be charged with political hit and run.
Profoundly moving, deeply considered and eloquently expressed opinion. Many thanks.
Thank you. I enjoy reading the thoughts of people who know enough that they know they don't have all the answers, but still wrestle toward a "common good" solution. Your columns and your work reflect that.
Mary Gay Scanlon is grotesque inside and out.
The one that stands out to me for the ages is discussed here: https://www.ncregister.com/blog/barbara-boxer-pro-choice-until-you-bring-baby-home?amp
Barbara Boxer suggesting that right to life begins when you bring the baby home from the hospital (normally 2 days after birth). Later give a chance to clarify context as slip of tongue, she refused.
I recently had someone tell me that Bobby Jindal was against abortion even if it was due to rape. While I don’t have the same exact position as Jindal, I found it ironic that this person described Jindal’s position as “cruel.” I guess aborting babies is not.
Your religion forbids you from having an abortion? Good. Don't have one. No one cares. Roe, or not, abortion is here to stay and there's nothing you can do about it. This is no longer 1973. Abortion pills can, and will, be handed out like candy so no girl is forced into childbirth against her will. Also, even Trump said he wants "exceptions" in cases of rape and incest. Anyone wanting a health care provider to perform an abortion will just say she was raped. Problem solved. Roe, or not. Abortion ain't going anywhere.
Nice deflection. Abortion supporters do that, and I’m not surprised, but it’s such a lame argument here. The point is that Scanlon called lifesaving measures for a struggling child “grotesque.” That says more about her, and people who support abortion, than anything I will ever write.
Rep. Mary Scanlon, D-Pa., said she opposes the GOP’s "grotesque attempt to politicize abortion care and criminalize doctors." Many would agree with her, Christine.
And….no o e is forced into getting pregnant. Rape is an extreme exception. The vast majority of abortions are chosen out of convenience, not necessity.
True. But, they'll be able to say they are "raped" to get an abortion.
Just saying, Roe, or not, is not going to stop girls and women from having abortions. It seems to me you think the end of abortion was when the Supreme Court tossed out Roe and gave it to the states to handle. Roe, or not, will not stop anything.
Except that they will then be subject to rape tests, police interviews, and all the rest...
"Your religion forbids you from having an abortion? Good. Don't have one. No one cares." Wow. Pretty cool customer aren't you Sophia? What does your religion say about abortion?